Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/05/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]My guess, based only on sheer speculation, is that maybe they see tit as directed against the MF digital market, many of whom may be disenfranchised square format shooters, with the 4/3 stuff directed at the amateur market. How else do you get a larger sensor within a fixed hypotenuse/diameter, other than by changing the aspect ratio more towards square (or a circle to maximize)? A 4:5 or square together with a wide dynamic range, would be more suited to wedding photography, etc. How many wedding photogs can afford a US$30K Hassy and all new lenses? Actually, I would have predicted Leica going to 16:9, if they are making a change. I'm sure they've done their market research/focus groups to see what has the greatest demand, or at least I hope so! We're no doubt over thinking this, and they are probably just adding a mm or two each way for in-camera VR! Tom On May 10, 2008, at 4:20 PM, Frank Filippone wrote: > Not much of an area improvement..... > > 30x30 = 900 sq. mm > 36x24 = 864 sq. mm > > Why, just because you are too lazy to turn the camera on its side? > > Truly, Tom is right.... if digital were not affected by existing > technologies ( 35mm film, 16mm film, TV formats) then the sensor > should have > been square. > > Frank Filippone > red735i@earthlink.net > > > So, just make it 30x30. > > Tom > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information